ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2025
Diagnostic performance of a novel point-of-care test for the diagnosis of visceral leishmaniasis in Sudan: A Comparative Accuracy Study.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
methodsThis study enrolled 107 VL suspects who attended a health centre in Gedaref between October 2022 and June 2023. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed by comparing the performance of the new index test (INgezimLeishma-CROM) with the comparator test (IT-LEISH) and parasitological examination as reference standard.
resultsOf 107 VL suspects screened by parasitological examination, 77 VL patients were smear positive and 30 were smear negative. Independent serological testing of these patients using INgezim Leishma-CROM showed a sensitivity of 98.7% [95% CI 92.23-99.97] and specificity of 92.5% [95% CI 75.71-99.09]. For IT-LEISH, both sensitivity [95% CI 84.39-97.20] and specificity [95% CI 75.71-99.09] were 92.5%. INgezim Leishma-CROM demonstrated increased diagnostic accuracy (97.2%) compared to IT-LEISH RDT (92.5%). Both RDTs gave positive results in 2 cases from the smear negative group that were previously treated for VL. All other non-VL cases (malaria, typhoid, brucellosis) were negative in both RDTs, showing 100% specificity, while VL patients co-infected with malaria were positive in both tests. Within the smear-negative group, 3 VL symptomatic cases that had been previously treated but still show clinical signs were all positive with INgezim Leishma-CROM but only 2 cases were positive with IT-LEISH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.